All gym-goers and runners gang up and downvote me... but this won't change what I said. Read up, educate yourself, research other species, and you'll find the truth.
And let me be even more direct: you're endorphins junkies!
back
2 comments
People aren't downvoting you because they disagree with you, they are downvoting you because your comment was poorly written and unconvincing.
It's still better than not bothering to take a stance, right? Time is limited, I work at the moment, past deadlines, etc. Often if you reply too late, nobody notices. I don't comment for vanity reasons, but for that one person that can appreciate my effort.
> It's still better than not bothering to take a stance, right?
No. It just makes the comments less valuable. I come to this site because of the diversity of insight and high quality of posts. No one is tallying the stances and declaring a "winner".
100,000 anti-vaxxer posts aren't going to make me an anti-vaxxer. One post that goes into the details of the molecular mechanisms that show how the chemicals in vaccines cause autism might (not that I expect it to happen, since it's baloney, but I hope you take my point).
You didn't get what I mean - I don't care about you or everybody that I won't be able to help; I care about the one person who I would help. I also don't care about the value of my comments, the karma, and other such things. I'm not here to service or entertain - and that includes myself, too. Take it or leave it, but don't go postal on people who try to help someone. Regarding autism - "Antidepressant Use During Pregnancy and the Risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children" [0].
[0]: https://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2476...
> but don't go postal on people who try to help someone
I hope I didn't come off that way, that was not my intention.
> I don't care about you or everybody that I won't be able to help; I care about the one person who I would help
Yes - my point is that that person might have been me. If you have an insight into a truth and you want to share it, but share it ineffectively, then we all lose.
You're being downvoted because your reasoning is pure nonsense. Yes, cells can divide only a limited number of times. And then they die. But guess what: your body is capable of creating new cells. This is in fact what happens when you lift weights: new muscle tissue is generated.
> Yes, cells can divide only a limited number of times. And then they die. But guess what: your body is capable of creating new cells.
If I read this correctly, you imply that "creating new cells" is somehow an alternative to cell division. This isn't true - cell division is in fact the only mechanism by which new cells normally(1) come to life.
Consequently if the GP was correct in general in saying that cells can divide only a limited number of times then yes, eventually the organism would lose the ability to regenerate and die. The reality is that not all cells have a limit on the number of divisions. Majority of differentiated cells do, but a few special types of cells have no such limit. These are called stem cells. Many tissues have stems cells on standby waiting for signals that trigger regeneration. Cancer cells often break out of the limit, too (2).
Telomeres provide a mechanism that limits the number of cell divisions - they get shortened on each division and once they become too short the cell loses the ability to divide further. Stems cells (and some cancer cells) express an enzyme called telomerase (3) that extends the telomeres to their original length after cell division.
(1) Reproductive cells (sperms and ovums) can also create a new cell by merging, but this isn't relevant for somatic cells.
(2) Cancer is a neat demonstration of the dangers that uncontrolled cell division poses for a complex organism and explains why most types of cells have their division machinery restricted or disabled.
Boosting telomerase is a double-edged sword - it can make cancer bloom, too, and we all have some cancerous cells in us.
Not all tissues are the same. Read more!